What would it take for Anthropic to move overseas, to some country more friendly to them? India, say. With their current employees working remotely from the US (or wherever they live). Is it possible?

I agree that some of these things---the ones that aren't explicable as searchlight beams reflecting off of clouds, or Venus, or balloons--- are not physical objects. My favorite idea is that someone (China, say) has lined up a bunch of tiny drones with radar transponders. When the first one in the line detects a radar ping from some American fighter, its transponder sends out a response that makes it look like a sizable object (whereas the drone itself is too small to show up on radar). Simultaneously it sends a signal to the next drone in the line, which does the same with some delay. Depending on the delay, the line of drones can appear to be a single object moving quickly or slowly. And if the line is bent, the virtual object can appear to take a sudden turn, or go into the water or come out of the water.

Optical illusions could be created in much the same way.

"Correct sun and moon icons during midnight sun — Fixed an icon that wrongly showed a moon during all-day daylight in polar regions... "
Huh? The Moon comes up in day time just like it does at night (with the possible exception of the full Moon, which rises about the same time the Sun sets, and sets about the same time the Sun rises). And if you look in the right place, you can see the Moon perfectly well in the daytime (assuming no clouds in the way).

"In modern war, the side with air superiority wins the war." That was Trump's theory in Iran.

Anthropic: We know our AI is not reliable enough to be used in military action.
Trump/Hegseth: What should we say?
Altman: Tell they you're smarter than they are, and you know it will work.
Trump/Hegseth: Hey, Anthropic, we're smarter than you are. Trust us!

There are a lot of people here posting that the Ribbon is a bad design, and I agree with them 110%. But that's not the only thing that's wrong with Word: it also distributes controls all around the edges, and unless you use it day in and day out, and use those distributed controls, it's a pain finding them.
Unfortunately, LibreOffice has copied this bad UI from Microsoft. I'm looking at LO Writer now, and in addition to the menu at the top, there's a sidebar on the right with eight or ten indecipherable icons (one of which looks like a hamburger menu, except it isn't). There's a Find box near the bottom with its controls. And on the status bar, there's a zoom (I think) gizmo on the right, something that looks like pages with folded-over corners next to that, a few more boxes or something, a page style chooser(?), and an image of a 3 1/2" floppy diskette on the left. I think I can get rid of all this cruft, but why is it there in the first place? I certainly don't use most of those things very often (except search, for which ^F works fine, thank you!), and they just waste space.

The traditional menu *could* be made context sensitive. So that's missing the point. The point (for me, and I think for a lot of other ribbon-haters) is that icons are mostly indecipherable, you have to look at the text label (or worse, mouse-over) to know what they do. Whereas we all understand words. (If we didn't, we wouldn't be using *Word*.)

Egypt gave up hieroglyphics after the mostly alphabetic Hieratic (and later Demotic) writing system came into use. Two millennia later, it took the Rosetta stone to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics.
We grew up with an alphabetic writing system, why on earth would Microsoft want to replace that with indecipherable icons?

The Ribbon is *exactly* why I switched from MsOffice to LibreOffice as soon as I retired. (I had to use Ms for my employer.)

There was an article in Washington Post a few weeks ago about the cost or running lights in a room when you're gone. The article said it was no more than a couple pennies per day, and the calculations work out.

Of course there soon won't be any pennies (in the US), and I turn off the lights anyway.

What could possibly go wrong? Well, that was anticipated in a 1963 SciFi story in Analog magazine (where else?): Walt and Leigh Richmond, "Where I Wasn't Going". Read it here:
https://www.gutenberg.org/cach...

Well, if super intelligence does come from an LLM, lilq1d will be wearing his sombrero on his waist.

I believe what the OP is saying is that this /. article duplicates what was published the day before in /., namely https://science.slashdot.org/s.... And in that he's exactly right, and I'm hoping some MOD will give him back his score.

"The mods all became power-trippers obsessed with closing questions and keeping people in line, rather than the original purpose of helping people."
This. (Not sure about all the mods, but at least some.)

No, I've not seen pointless questions there. I have seen pointless moderation (closing what I considered to be good questions--and not just mine).